Brent Council to adopt new prioritising system for capital projects

Brent Council is set to introduce a permanent pipeline for capital projects with some moved into the main programme when 'strategically and economically advantageous to do so but always subject to the submission of detailed business cases and Cabinet approval where applicable. LINK

The list makes interesting reading with some projects only at early stages of development. Clues to the Council's long-term thinking are apparent in some of the proposals including, for example, Proposal 28 William Dunbar/Saville House (South Kilburn) which hasn't been moved to the main programme at present:

28. William Dunbar/Saville (ERSK) - £10M  

Proposal to bring forward a development in South Kilburn to accelerate delivery of the programme. Build on space around existing buildings, decant tenants, then demolish and build. Will require earlier buy back and a higher level of affordable than envisaged in theMasterplan (as end of programme no decants were expected to this site so more private were due to be built) due to decant requirements. 

Pipeline projects with those moved to main programme highlighted in yellow.(Click lower right corner for full page)

Anger as developer lobs in an extra storey on Dollis Hill proposal pleading viability

Less than a month after Alice Lester, Brent Council Head of Planning, sent formal permission for the development at  4-9 Gladstone Parade, the developer has come in with a new application to add an additional storey and an additional 16 units to the proposal. LINK

Their knowledge of the local area is a little suspect when they can't spell the name of the road correctly!:

In comparison with the previous scheme, the proposal introduces an additional storey to the Edgeware Road frontage as well as a partial additional storey at both the Dollis Hill Avenue and Gladstone Park frontages. The raising of the height of the building by 712mm is minimal in the context of the overall development and will barely be perceptible in the wider street scene. The proposal is of a similar, albeit smaller, height to the Fellows Square development on the opposite side of Edgeware Road and therefore the increase in height is considered accepting  (sic) in terms of the emerging local context.

The increase in the number of units is based on a viability assessment:

The Development Appraisal, prepared by James R Brown and Company Ltd, assess the financial viability of the proposed scheme and the residential market in London. 


 Since the viability review of the previous scheme, dated March 2017, the new homes market in London has increasingly and significantly weakened. Residual land values are therefore reducing due to weaker new homes values and increased build costs. Subsequently, the viability of the 38-residential unit scheme is now substantially challenged (due to the weaker market conditions) and therefore in order to improve the viability and efficiency of the site a larger scheme of 54 units its proposed. 


The residential content of the new proposed scheme contains a 34.4% affordable housing provision by habitable room, detail in paragraph 9.2 of the viability report. The appraisal demonstrates that the proposed scheme drives a negative residual deficit and falls marginally short of being viable with 16 affordable housing units in comparison to the consented scheme which is significantly unviable with 10 affordable housing units. 


The revised proposal is already garnering opposition on social media:

Planning Officers recommend approval of Spurs' extra Wembley games

Brent Planning Officers have recommended that the January 16th Planning Committee LINK approves the application for Spurs to hold eight additional matches at Wembley Stadium between January 15th and May 12th if their new stadium is not ready. Five of the games would be capped at 62,000 and three at 90,000. Neither Brent Council, nor Quintain have been willing to comment to Wembley Matters on how these extra games would impact on the plans to remove the Stadium pedway and replace  with steps before Euro2020. LINK

Submissions from residents were 30 to 1 objecting. No submissions were received from  Barry Gardiner MP, Barnhill Residents' Association or Wembley Stadium Residents Advisory Committee. I can find no record of comments from Tokyngton Ward councillors that include Council Leader Muhammed Butt.

Wembley Central and Alperton Residents' Association acknowledged the economic benefits but stipulated that should permission be granted the sporting events should not be carried over for other events if Spurs return to their new stadium.

This is the officers' conclusion after considering the issues in detail:

The objections received indicate that there is a level of impact currently experienced by events at the stadium from Spurs matches. These mostly relate to anti-social behaviour and transport. Some impacts are expected, as it is a large stadium in a location with residents and businesses nearby. 

Additional events, limited to a capacity of 51,000, can take place at the stadium irrespective of the outcome of the application. 

The original cap on events was imposed to manage the impacts until such time as specific transport improvements had been made. Whilst most of these have taken place, not all of them have been realised. Circumstances have changed since the original planning permission in 2002, which suggest that the final piece of transport infrastructure (the Stadium Access Corridor) will not be provided in the originally envisaged form, but other changes to the road network are now envisaged. A further change is the level of development within the area, which has increased the population and will continue to do so. Therefore, the Council considers that the cap remains relevant. 

Clearly, to increase the number of events to accommodate Tottenham Hotspur would imply a commensurate increase in the impact, albeit that it is proposed to be temporary and only in relation to 8 games. 

In analysing the impacts there has been some concern about the level of economic benefit which would result, and this is primarily centred on visitor expenditure. In any event it seems common sense that there would be winners and losers on event days, dependent on the type of business. This makes it all the more important that the social impacts on event days are further mitigated. A number of additional measures have been secured to deal with some of these issues. 

Transportation issues have been extensively raised, and there are ongoing efforts to reduce the number of vehicles on a match day. A number of mitigation measures are proposed to continue this work. Some of these allow for existing work to continue, and others are new or updated. The pirate parking initiative is considered particularly important. On an individual event basis, Tottenham Hotspur do have the ability to influence their supporters’ behaviour over the course of a season, which is more difficult than for visitors on a one-off basis such as the FA Cup final. Addressing transport issues will also contribute to reducing noise and air quality issues. 

In summary, it is recognised that there is a level of impact being caused by major events now, and that this would increase with an increase in the number of high capacity major events. However, the measures proposed would ensure that this is mollified as much as is reasonably achievable. All are considered necessary to mitigate the increased number of matches which this application proposes. A further consideration is that Tottenham Hotspur could use the stadium for major events up to 51,000 now without restriction, and were they to do that then no additional mitigation measures would be formally secured. 

The proposed additional mitigation would apply to Tottenham Hotspur events, and with some of these being within the existing cap would represent a theoretical improvement for these major events. 

The proposal is, on balance, recommended for approval.

New Workers' Rights Support Group set up in Brent

A welcome initiative from Brent Unite Community, Brent Community Law Centre and Brent Trades Council.  With many having to claim benefits despite being in work and the erosion of worers' rights collective action in the workplace is essential.

Park Lane, Wembley, to be closed for 2 weeks from January 14th

Few locals will have missed the giant 'Twin Towers' rising up on the former Chesterfield House site on the junction of Wembley High Road and Park Lane. Now Park Lane will be closed for two weeks from January 14th to enable several utility companies to install gas, water and sewage to the new development.

Remembering the disruption caused by partial closure of Wembley High Road for sewage works locals are asking why these works were not done over the Christmas period.

Buses (297, 79 & 204) will be diverted down Wembley High Road to Wembley Triangle and then Wembley Hill Road.

Quintain takes out crane climbing injunction at Wembley Park development

From Construction Enquirer

Wembley developer Quintain has taken out an injunction to stop people climbing its cranes.
Teenage daredevil George Henry King-Thompson is named in the injunction secured at the High Court last month.

The document bans anyone from climbing more than two metres above street level on any part of the Wembley Park construction sites.

The injunction is in force until December 2023.

Quintain said:

Quintain Limited and associated companies have obtained a High Court injunction preventing unauthorised access into buildings and building sites at our Wembley Park development.

This follows a number of incidents where individuals placed themselves and others in danger.

The injunction was sought against one named individual and other unnamed individuals who may seek to trespass in future.

We take the safety of the public and our staff extremely seriously.

Individuals who engage in persistently disruptive and dangerous behaviour put themselves and others at risk of significant harm.

We will always act to prevent them from doing so.

Northwick Park Community Garden Permaculture Workshop January 31st

From Northwick Park Community Garden

What is a food forest – come and learn about the design planned for Northwick Park Community Garden on Thursday 31st January, 6:30pm-9:00pm
Venue: Annunciation Church, 194 Windermere Avenue, Wembley HA9 8QT

This workshop will explain the permaculture forest garden design that will transform an area of Northwick Park which will be planted with a wide range of edible plants. Susannah Hall from Permablitz London will go through how the design will create a food-producing, ecological and wildlife-friendly space that will increase the range of wildlife habitats and nectar forage for bees and butterflies. The workshop will pay special attention to introducing you to a range of lesser-known edible perennial plants. From this workshop you will learn about the principles of permaculture design that you could then begin to apply to your own garden or allotment.

Nearest tube station is South Kenton on the Bakerloo Line/London Overground. Preston Road tube station on Metropolitan line is 10-15 minutes walk from the church.
Tickets: £10 • Email northwickparkcommunitygarden@gmail.com to book your place today.

Wembley reduced to 50% share of Neighbourhood CIL from 83% in new Cabinet proposals

EXISTING DISTRIBUTION

PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION

Widespread complaints about the unequal distribution of Neighbourhood Community Infrastructure Levy monies have resulted in a proposal going before the January 14th Cabinet that will reduce Wembley's share of Neighbourhood CIL from the present 83% to 50% of the total fund - that is a proposed total of £4.23m versus what would have been £7.06m using the existing distribution method.

Wembley retains the lion's share with other areas getting an equal share of the remainder but significantly more for the most part than they get now.  This is Option 4 in the table below:

 The report provides the following commentary on the options:

.        Option 1 (Retain existing distribution). This would be unpopular in light of the review. A significant number of the focus groups and interviews saw the distribution of NCIL funds and concentration of money in Wembley as unfair. Wembley stakeholders were keen to retain a significant sum of NCIL as they are impacted the most by development in the area. However, based on current and future projections, the gap in NCIL funds available to Wembley and the remaining four ClL neighbourhoods is set to increase. 


.        Option 2 (No distribution). NCIL receipts could be used anywhere across the borough. Bidders could propose projects to access funds irrespective of where the funds were generated. This would be easiest method of distribution and would allow equal access to

.        Option 2 could also help mitigate any impact felt by a different community beyond the NCIL boundary. However greater monitoring would still be required to ensure that one part of the borough was not disproportionately allocated funding. The disadvantages of this option are that the areas more greatly affected by development will lose out on the total value of NCIL receipts that would have been allocated if the existing distribution model were retained.

.        Option 3 (Equal Distribution). NCIL receipts would be redistributed equally across the five CIL Neighbourhoods. This would be appealing to areas that do not currently attract significant development. However this approach may disadvantage communities that are impacted most by development. 


.        Option 4 (Wembley 50% cap – other areas equal). Wembley’s NCIL fund would be capped at 50% of the total NCIL receipts generated in the borough. The remaining 50% would be divided equally between the remaining four CIL Neighbourhoods. This option would ensure that a greater proportion of NCIL Funds is allocated to the Wembley Neighbourhood where the majority of development currently takes place but also ensure that wider impacts of development are addressed elsewhere. 


.        Option 5 (Wembley 50% cap – other areas proportional). Wembley’s NCIL fund would be capped at 50% of the total NCIL receipts generated. The value of NCIL available in the remaining four CIL Neighbourhoods is set proportionally based on the amount of NCIL raised in their area. Based on current NCIL receipts the proportion would be Harlesden 41.86%, Kilburn 21.05%, Kingsbury 20.63% and Willesden 16.46%. This option would ensure that a greater proportion of CIL Funds is allocated to the Wembley Neighbourhood, however in the future, areas where there is less development will receive fewer NCIL funds. 


-->
Other proposed changes are minor and subject to change when a decision is made on ward boundaries except for a proposal to enlarge the decision making group evaluating proposals to four (Option 4):

Comments welcome.